Interspecialty differences in the obstetric care of low-risk women

被引:81
作者
Rosenblatt, RA
Dobie, SA
Hart, LG
Schneeweiss, R
Gould, D
Raine, TR
Benedetti, TJ
Pirani, MJ
Perrin, EB
机构
[1] UNIV ROCHESTER,SCH MED,DEPT FAMILY MED,ROCHESTER,NY
[2] GEORGETOWN UNIV,MED CTR,DEPT OBSTET & GYNECOL,WASHINGTON,DC
[3] UNIV WASHINGTON,SCH MED,DEPT OBSTET & GYNECOL,SEATTLE,WA 98195
[4] UNIV WASHINGTON,SCH PUBL HLTH & COMMUNITY MED,DEPT HLTH SERV,SEATTLE,WA 98195
关键词
D O I
10.2105/AJPH.87.3.344
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Objectives. This study examined differences among obstetricians, family physicians, and certified nurse-midwives in the patterns of obstetric care provided to low-risk patients. Methods. For a random sample of Washington State obstetrician-gynecologists, family physicians, and certified nurse-midwives, records of a random sample of their low-risk patients beginning care between September 1, 1988, and August 31, 1989, were abstracted. Results. Certified nurse-midwives were less likely to use continuous electronic fetal monitoring and had lower rates of labor induction or augmentation than physicians. Certified nurse-midwives also were less likely than physicians to use epidural anesthesia. The cesarean section rate for patients of certified nurse-midwives was 8.8% vs 13.6% for obstetricians and 15.1% for family physicians. Certified nurse-midwives used 12.2% fewer resources. There was little difference between the practice patterns of obstetricians and family physicians. Conclusions. The low-risk patients of certified nurse-midwives in Washington State received fewer obstetrical interventions than similar patients cared for by obstetrician-gynecologists or family physicians. These differences are associated with lower cesarean section rates and less resource use.
引用
收藏
页码:344 / 351
页数:8
相关论文
共 64 条
[51]   THE IMPACT OF NONCLINICAL FACTORS ON REPEAT CESAREAN-SECTION [J].
STAFFORD, RS .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1991, 265 (01) :59-63
[52]   ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR CONTROLLING RISING CESAREAN-SECTION RATES [J].
STAFFORD, RS .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 263 (05) :683-687
[53]   CESAREAN-SECTION USE AND SOURCE OF PAYMENT - AN ANALYSIS OF CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL DISCHARGE ABSTRACTS [J].
STAFFORD, RS .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 1990, 80 (03) :313-315
[54]  
Taffel S M, 1989, Stat Bull Metrop Insur Co, V70, P2
[55]   CESAREAN-SECTION RATE LEVELS OFF IN 1987 [J].
TAFFEL, SM ;
PLACEK, PJ ;
MOIEN, M .
FAMILY PLANNING PERSPECTIVES, 1989, 21 (05) :227-228
[56]   THE USE OF INTRADEPARTMENTAL AUDIT TO CONTAIN CESAREAN-SECTION RATE [J].
TAY, SK ;
TSAKOK, FHM ;
NG, CSA .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 1992, 39 (02) :99-103
[57]  
TUSSING AD, 1994, HEALTH SERV RES, V29, P75
[58]  
WAGNER M, 1991, Journal of Public Health Policy, V12, P443, DOI 10.2307/3342556
[59]  
WANDERER MJ, 1980, J FAM PRACTICE, V11, P601
[60]   TRENDS IN OBSTETRIC OPERATIVE PROCEDURES, 1980 TO 1987 [J].
ZAHNISER, SC ;
KENDRICK, JS ;
FRANKS, AL ;
SAFTLAS, AF .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 1992, 82 (10) :1340-1344